Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Evil Ones

Today’s post is a re-blog from Father Blake’s website. (see here) The post is so brilliant, that I am posting it in its entirety. It captures the true spirit of the times. Whether it’s the pandering of Francis and the neon-modernists to the special interests or the rise and rule of the mob as was the case in Indiana recently, at the end of the day, it is ONLY about one issue and one issue alone: the TRUTH.

On Good Friday, the Catholic Church will be 185 days from the beginning of the Synod of Bishops of 2015. The Synod Fathers will find themselves, for the first time in 1982 years, in the same position as that of the metropolitan elite on Good Friday in 33 Anno Domini.

Here is how Fr. Blake described that event:

The real villains of the Crucifixion are the clergy, who manipulate the Sanhedrin and the politicians, they have  lost sight of their true vocation, they cling to power and influence and are concerned about their own faction’s advancement, God simply does not figure in their thinking, except as another weapon in their armoury.

So the question arises, how many of the present clergy will be so intent on holding onto power, that they will sacrifice the TRUTH and “kill the Lamb of God” 1982 years on?

There will be one novel aspect to this greatest story ever told this time around. And yes, the irony of the novelty aspect does not escape me. Chalk one up to unintended consequences and to the “god of surprises”. But I digress… In Anno Domini 2015, the one on whose head the decision rests, will not be a foreign military governor, but the descendant of Peter himself. It is Francis that is the absolute monarch, and it will be he who decided whether to “sacrifice the Lamb of God” in this day and age.

Regardless of what the Synod Fathers say.

Back to the post. Here is an excellent comment from Thomas to the below re-blogged post. It sums up exactly where the Mystical Body of Christ finds itself two millennia after the Redemption and 50 years after the “spirit of Vatican II”. The prescient observation in this comment points out that even though Pilate behaved like a coward, even the cowardice of Pilate had its limits. Here is that relevant passage:

They tried to tame the Truth by nailing him to a cross. And they are still trying. Pontius Pilate, despite his cowardice, had the truth about him which he recognised in his heart of hearts written on a sign and nailed above his head. So there could be no mistake about what was really going on. They hated that and tried to get it removed. But Pilate simply said: “What I have written, I have written”. They could torture and kill his body, but they could not destroy the Truth that is his very Person. On the third day the Lion broke free …

Back to the present, and from the above comment and from what we have observed over the last two years, one question comes to mind. If Francis does go through with the “sacrificing of the Lamb of God”, regardless of whether it is by papal fiat or by silent acceptance of the deviation to the TRUTH, will he at least have the decency to admit to what he has done?

Which leaves one wonder whether Francis is anything like the man that Pilate was and whether he at least will have the decency to “despite his cowardice, had the truth about him which he recognised in his heart of hearts written on a sign and nailed above his head.”

Or to put it another way, does the admitted cowardice of Francis have a limit?

Time will tell.

FOR THE RECORD

Who killed Jesus? They did!
So, being more nuanced Politicians did it.

The Gospels are careful to note the interplay of power and fear, of popularity and rabble raising, threats and the machinations of disciple, principally Judas but also Peter, the ‘Jews’ and Romans.

The two crowds; the Galileans who wave palm branches in victory and greet Jesus with cries of ‘Hosanna’ in expectation of the Kingdom are not the same as the metropolitan elite who cry ‘Crucify him’. The former support Christ the latter the anti-Chist, supporters Bar-Abbas, the other ‘Son of the Father’. To prevent a clash between these two parties is why Pilate and his force is in Jerusalem, they are on high alert and expect trouble.

The Jerusalem clergy are politicized, intent on holding onto power, trying to score points off the local Roman governor, Pilate, Josephus tells of their complaints to Rome, so their words about Pilate not being a friend of Caesar’s are full of menace. The High Priest’s words, “It is better for one man to die for the people than for the whole nation to be destroyed” are rich in theology but Caiaphas is more concerned for himself and his priestly or courtly faction than for the salvation of the nation.

It is on this altar that the Jesus the Lamb is sacrificed. St John whose major theme in his Gospel is ‘Truth’ has Pilate ask Jesus, Truth himself, ‘What is truth?’, and then almost immediately wash his hands of truth, preferring expediency and realpolitik to truth. Yet Pilate really seems to be a victim along with Jesus, though he is willing to sacrifice his integrity, he like Herod, who killed the Baptist, has a fascination with the truth, he seeks the truth in the abstract, though he, ultimately like Herod, destroys what fascinates him.

The real villains of the Crucifixion are the clergy, who manipulate the Sanhedrin and the politicians, they have  lost sight of their true vocation, they cling to power and influence and are concerned about their own faction’s advancement, God simply does not figure in their thinking, except as another weapon in their armoury.

I spoke recently to a priest who was ordained a decade or so ago. He discerned his vocation in the full maelstrom of the abuse crisis, many of his family and friends thought him either mad or a pederast, they couldn’t understand why a decent lad like him would feel a vocation to an organisation which was being daily exposed as a source of corruption and depravity, with leaders who were themselves either corrupt or facilitated and covered-up the wickedness of others. ‘In those days being a young practicing Catholic was bad enough’, he said, ‘wanting to be a priest was for many of friends incomprehensible’.

Older clergy and even younger clergy from the non-English speaking world perhaps do not realise how much the Church has moved on from the post Concillior period. One serious danger is that senior bishops still think of themselves in terms of guarding the polis of the Church by trying to ‘tame’ the truth or manipulate it rather than letting it loose and allowing it to defend itself. We saw this in the child abuse crisis, we see it repeated again in the antics of those involved in the Synod.

I know the Holy Father says about prayer being preferable to gossip about the Synod. I presume he is not suggesting that there should be no  talk about Cardinals intercepting books sent to Synod delegates or Archbishops ‘pre-writing’ the Relatio or trying to rig the voting or manipulate discussion, to me some ‘gossip’, if it is that, seems very healthy: ‘sunlight being the best disinfectant’, comes to mind. The Truth is like a Lion,.. let it loose and it will defend itself.